Monday, August 27, 2012

On The Filter Bubble

Now that we have viewed Eli Pariser's TED Talk (from March, 2011) and discussed its implications in class, please comment on one of the following questions:

1) Is it okay if you are only seeing search results (articles, ads, etc.) that mirror your political beliefs?
2) Do we need a policy? Should government set guidelines for filtering algorithms on the Internet?

To satisfy the requirements for this assignment, you must either: 1) post your opinion - thoughtfully; and/or 2) respond to one of your classmates' posts - in the spirit of deliberative dialogue.

(Daily grade)

THREE IMPORTANT NOTES:
1. Consider writing in MS Word and using copy-and-paste to enter your comment... at least until you are comfortable using our blog.
2. In order for the post to be saved at our blog you'll likely need to sign-in; use this opportunity to follow our blog!
3. Remember to 'sign' your post with first name and last initial ONLY - to earn full credit.

126 comments:

FIRST!As was discussed in the TED video, the source of information available on the internet is changing. Organizations like Facebook and Google are creating even more in depth ways of customizing their services for specific users. This potentially beneficial decision has had consequences though. New algorithms edit the results of searches depending on what they can tell about the user’s preferences. Not only is this preventing people from seeing different views than their own, it can also distort their view of the current news. Despite whether this is considered a good or a bad thing, the question arises as to whether or not government should be able to control these algorithms. The algorithms determine what to show you based on things like what type of computer you use, your location, and your favorite links. If government could control this, even with good intentions, it could have dire consequences. I believe that a government control of what we see and hear about online could be catastrophic. The difference between a non-government controlled media source and a government-controlled one may not be apparent when the news is good but I believe that the government will be reluctant to criticize themselves. This would inevitably lead to government censorship of news, something I am not a fan of. I believe that it’s up to each individual to be interested in political opinions other than themselves and not the government’s. I do not believe that the government should filter these algorithms.

As seen in the TED video, the internet is changing at a rapid pace. Search engines and social media sites these days are directing and gearing their advertisements to the individual. This type of filtering is not beneficial because it obscures viewpoints different from the point of view of the individual that is targeted. When it comes to politics, one-sided articles and ads that are supposed to mirror your beliefs are harmful to our voting system. For one, the internet does not necessarily know one hundred percent what your political views are just from detecting the location you are searching from and your history on websites such as Google and facebook. Because of this inaccuracy, the ads may not even reflect your views like they are meant to. Even if the ads and articles did mirror your political beliefs, they are aimed to be one-sided and not open-minded. From seeing such propaganda, your mind and opinion on a certain political topic could easily be set in stone and closed off to any other viewpoints. Such a way of thinking is not beneficial to a government and political system where it is important that the right people are chosen to lead our nation, not just people expressed in the ads and articles shown through the new filtering algorithms. In order to vote correctly, one must be presented with the facts, good or bad, on every party involved, so they are given a chance to form a fair opinion.

On occasion, I believe that it is okay to be seeing advertisements, articles, and ect. that mirror a belief that one has. Almost every sight that a person clicks on now contains an article or some type of advertisement. I also agree with Kira, that filtering these advertisements and article cuts off other opinions that we could have viewed and that could have been beneficial to our learning. As citizens, we should be able to get the exposure to different sides of everyhing, so that we know what is going on in the world. Although I think that we should see all sides of things, and not just what the Internet wants us to see, there doesn't necessarily have to be a policy for that. If the government gets involved in the filtering of what goes on these websites, they'll make it their own opinion and change things. In conclusion, I believe that the government shouldn't set guidelines for filtering algorithms on the Internet. I believe that it should be up to the person on the Internet to set controls as to what they see and what they don't want to see. Having the ability to set boundaries on filtering algorithms would make everything a lot easier.

As we watched in the TED video the Internet has rapidly changed and has become more of a better source for all of us. Yet, like everything else, the Internet has a great flaw in it algorithms by setting us in a “Filter Bubble” as Eli Pariser has said. This “Filter Bubble” so to say is truly blocking us from everything that could possibly be important. It shouldn’t be setting in a sense as to where it we are “restricted” so to say other information. We shouldn’t have our “bubble” set to what the algorithms feel as though is relevant to our lives. They might be taking basic, important information out of our lives just for the basic fact that they feel as if a person is more happy with it adapting to it’s “personality.” I feel as if that the companies should not have the option of whether something is not shown to us and is restricted by the algorithms. They should prioritize the fact maybe along with our “filter bubble” and give a mix of what the company feels as if would be a good “filter bubble” for the person as well as the important basic information that should be noticed by a person. The algorithms shouldn’t so heavily be waited on the way a person checks his/her sites and should be based on what may/may not be important.

I don’t think the government should control what someone's search engine or Facebook should show them. If a person were to want to see the other side of what they believe then they would look it up on their own. Nobody should be forced to see other information that might not pertain to their search. I think it's fine if people only see things that relate to what their opinion is as long as their informed about what each party stands for. If they only read democratic news and saw democratic ad's, before voting for a side they would need to be knowledgeable on whether the candidate representing their party stood for what they believed. However, if someone were to vote based solely on what they have seen directed to them online, it could become a problem because they would never know what the other side has to offer. At our age, I would personally be annoyed if something unrelated to my search were to come up when I searched something. It’s a convenience that Google or Facebook tailors their search results to what you usually would look for. As long as the public makes it a priority to know what the other side of an argument offers, nothing should be changed about the way the Internet works.

I enjoyed the TED video, I feel like this guy really had a strong grasp at the topic and problem at hand. This was an issue that I never realized was going on until it was brought to my attention. The more and more I thought about I realized that this was really happening. The super sites that are doing this are disguising it so well that the majority of people aren’t noticing it so this hasn’t become a serious issue yet. Its almost as if this issue wont become of popular interest until this video or videos like this one are shown to the population. So I believe that our new goal as a community should be to branch out this problem to the rest of the world. We can’t let the Internet control our preferences and the outlook on our political views without us being able to change it from doing so. The Internet can now prevent people from seeing other views and it’s making a difference whether you like it or not. This problem must and can be stopped before it becomes overwhelming. And we can help.

As seen in the TED video today in class our world is rapidly changing. Companies such as Google, Facebook, and Yahoo, have entered into a new realm, you could call it of internet technology. Google for one has developed a system with 57 different taps to see where you are sitting, where you are, and what you have looked up in the past, just to name a few to decide what should pop up in your search. I do not believe that it is okay to only be seeing ideals politically or non-politically for that matter. The whole point of living life, to me, is to a different assortment of ideals so that you can u can express yourself in the ideas that express who you truly are. If someone, or something, is choosing what they perceive is the best thing for you, they are taking away, what I perceive, as one of the main purposes to our life. As people, we should be given the opportunity to see, hear, read, and watch what we choose to watch. Maybe we were raised as a liberal, and when we watched commercials, read the news or newspaper, see on internet, etc. that were solely liberal, we would never know anything else that was out there, therefore not being able to gain our own political ideals and be able to make the step of choosing how we would like to go about choosing our own political stand. Without seeing or hearing about how other political sects view subjects, how would we be able to know which side of the board I should I be on; which party should I be a part of; what do I believe in?

To start off, I think that the Internet is and will continue to be a strong foundation of public information. Based on what we heard in the TED video, the process known as filtering is taking control of many websites and thus not allowing many people to see what others may see. Some see this as convenience, others corruption. However, I think that as of now the filters provide a helpful service to many. Although there are many people who are eager to expand their knowledge far beyond the five word suggestions Google may have for them, I still believe that there is no reason at this stage in time for the government to get involved with search engines, social networking sites, etc. Not only would that allow them to alter unnecessary factors of these sites but it would also permanently change our convenient “filtering” appliance. I also think that those news-hounds and knowledge seekers would be curious enough to search other broad topics on their own. Therefore in conclusion, I think that the Internet should be able to continue the “filtering” system and the Internet should remain the same.

Sometimes, I feel like seeing advertisements, articles, etc. that mirror my political beliefs is beneficial to my well-being. However, I like to broaden my horizons most of the time when I am searching on the internet. In this video, it stated both social media sites and search engines are both starting to concentrate searches on your search history; For social media sites, like Facebook, I feel like it is necessary to filter it because when I look at my Facebook news feed, I like looking at things that I like seeing or I'm interested in, and I don't want to look at updates or photos from people I don't know. For search engines though, I don't particularly like the engine searching around things I like or enjoy, because when I get on google or yahoo, I usually go on it to search for things and people I know nothing about... So if I searched something basic, it could give me something I don't want to know about when it should be giving every piece of information it can on that one subject. When I saw the TED video, I wasn't so surprised that search engines were starting to do “filter bubbles” because of our rapidly growing technological innovations. Though I don't necessarily enjoy the the “filter bubble” it will just be another thing I have to get used to.

As seen in the TED video, the Internet was originally intended to be a way for people all over the world to connect and communicate with each other. Search engines and social networking sites such as Google and Facebook are using users location and web history to filter ads and specific articles, creating a “filter bubble” with articles and ads that Facebook and Google think we want to see. Filtering was initially created to help people by making it faster for them to find what they need quicker and more efficiently. The problem is, that users are only seeing one-sided articles and ads, that mirror their political beliefs, but may discourage people from being open-minded about others opinions and beliefs. Also, reading only one-sided political articles and ads causes the reader to not have all of the facts about any particular issue. This is a problem having all of the facts and hearing both sides of the issue are critical to a person making an informed decision for themself. Although the “filter bubble may be helpful at times, for the most part I think it keeps us from critically thinking and forming our own opinion on the given issue.

The main topic of the TED video is how the main websites such as Google, Facebook, Yahoo, etc. are giving different things to people that search for the same thing. Based on your location what you search and many other things these sites determine what you will most enjoy from what you searched. This is a good thing for these sites because you will see things you find interesting about what you searched so you will like the site because it gave you something you liked. Although the down side to this is sometimes because it brings up what it thinks you will like it may not bring up something important. Therefore you may not know important things about the government or current events. People need to know things like this so they can be involved in the government but be involved in a way where they understand what is going on. I think that the government should set guidelines for filtering because it is honestly not helping the people in the country realize the current events and all the important things happening. If the government made guidelines then i think people would have a more educated role when approaching governmental topics.

Today I went to look up articals for debate and I thought about this video. I believe that it is pointless to have a filter like this that "mirrors" what your views are because some people search things that aren't what their beliefs are. For instance, when looking for articals for debate I look up many different sides to arguments that I may not necessaraly agree on. If this is the case and google is now thinking that I believe these things I look up, it does two things, one it stops the amount of opinions getting to me, and by extention it limits my knowlege. Now let's look at it in a wider scale. Let's say there's a republican who was looking at an artical on Fox News that one of his buddies suggests. Because of that time, or the other times this person looks at these sources, this one person's whole opinion may be changed because every time they log on to the computer they will only see one side of the political and public sphere.

As we saw in the TED video today, the internet has changed immensely and is providing more information to the public. The trick is internet services such as Facebook, Yahoo and Goggle are flirting the things you do see. As seen in the video the internet services are showing different people different things and reducing the real world events and showing you events that you might be more interested in. This is a serious problem that needs to be sought out through serious consideration because it’s not right for us to get on the internet and have it flirted for our preferences. I think that this could easily be solved if government came into play. I think that if the government made a law or told the services that they had to have buttons that would allow the user to pick his preferences it would solve a lot of the algorithms. In conclusion, I believe that the government needs to come into play and address the issue. I think that it can easily be solved with the simple task of adding choice preference buttons and will give the user much more control over what he or she wants to see.

Do we need a policy? Should government set guidelines for filtering algorithms on the Internet?

I believe that the TED video made very strong points as to why a policy for filtering algorithms on the internet would be a very potent idea. I though more strongly believe that search engines on the internet are meant to be personalized based on what an individual would be most interested in. For example, during the TED video when the pictures of two different peoples google searches of Egypt came up, I began to think about how interesting and helpful that could potentially be based on my location and the 78 other ways google is constantly working. I feel that a policy whether it be made by government or even the company itself would be a step backward in technology in society. Today everything is about moving forward, and these ways of the internet and search engines such as google are far from perfecting these algorithms. I say give it time and appreciate the kind of hard work being used to help us be able to find things on google. On another note, I feel that the government has much more important tasks at hand than setting guidelines for filtering on the internet. If the government would like to encourage sites to begin filtering that in my opinion would be fine, but a policy to force filtering should not be in their best interests during the present age we live in. All of this being said, I am neither for nor against the idea of filtering, I just do not find it that important of a task needing to be solved at this moment.

As seen in the TED video, the Internet has changed throughout the years and is continuing to change rapidly. The TED video explains how websites such as Google, Facebook, and Yahoo are altering the information you see based upon your location, previous sites viewed, or even the type of browser you have. I believe this is a problem because you are only seeing ads and articles that are of interest to you, and not receiving a well-rounded outlook on news and important issues. I believe it is necessary to see articles, ads, etc. that do not mirror your political beliefs. There are ads that may voice one’s opinion as opposed to the true facts, and for this reason I believe it is necessary to see a variety of articles so the viewer doesn’t overlook the true facts. Although it may be convenient at times for the Internet to filter articles to match pages you have previously visited, it does not offer an overall, unbiased perspective that is necessary to allow you to make your own political decisions. We need to be exposed to other points of view and ideas that we may not agree with in order to form our own, individual opinions.

I thought that Eli Pariser had some very interesting points in his discussion at TED Talk. His opener, talking about how growing up in a small town and how the Internet was supposed to be a portal to the world, is what really got me thinking the most. The internet when you get down to it, even if used for more pointless things like Facebook or Twitter, should be that “teleportation device” that takes us across the world to learn about different places and cultures, as well as a place to find facts and opinions that one would normally not be exposed to. Honestly in my opinion, I don’t think that Google searches should be tailor-made per user. With Pariser’s reference to how his Facebook friends were filtered based on their political preferences, how is one supposed to learn both sides of issues if they only see the conservative or liberal opinions? Also, with people using the internet at such a young age, many kids may put their political preference on their profiles based on what their parents believe, or what part of the country they live in. With Internet algorithims immediately canceling out opposite views, how are young people supposed to really learn what is going on in society, from both points of view? That can’t be beneficial for the future. Political policies over these algorithms could definitely be a good contribution and open the eyes of many people who only have been exposed to certain viewpoints on political issues. Although, some people may feel like the government having policies on monitoring internet use as some form of censorship, which could cause major controversy, but I definitely think that there should be less filtering as it will be beneficial to all, and give people more well-rounded views on political topics.

This video was very informative, I have never heard of this filter bubble that these major websites use, until today. I do not think it is right that these major websites are filtering posts and articles for us. I say this because you will not be getting the big picture on all the views. Ultimately I think if this keeps on happening for the next five to ten years; the republican or democratic parties will start paying website owners to show their political views. If these major websites are controlling what we see and read without even telling us, it is not fair, because it is stealing out right to view everything that should be there. That is why we come to the internet; because we think it is a neutral viewpoint because there is no one person behind every search policing what you see and what you cannot see. But now in this video they have created this formula which now filter and changes the searches to what it thinks that we want to see, without even asking us. If this issue gets out of hand I do not think the government should get involved because as I said before, the people behind the government will somehow try to swat the people opinion so that their party can obtain more votes.

As seen in the TED video the internet is changing, negatively. Some of the most popular websites such as facebook, google, and yahoo, are filtering the things you search and browse. The TED video explains that depending on your location, and the previous things that you have searched. For example the TED video said that two different people looked up Egypt in google, one showed current news, the other showed vacation spots. That can be especially be bad because a person could have not heard of all the problems in egypt now, they could have gone there and gotten themselves in a sticky situation. i believe if people spoke out to google, facebook, yahoo and the other websites that use filtering, that people could change it. All it takes is an idea, a simple idea, that idea could effect the whole internet. Once the idea is planted people will speak out, and once enough people are informed and disagree with filtering they will change it. Once that the idea of filtering is bad has spread we can save the internet from going in the complete wrong direction.

In our country the political system has two different opinions which consists of the republican side and the democratic side. There are many information resources online, on television, and on the radio that give one sided opinions, trying to force one into believing what those resources have to say. For example, as we discussed in class, Fox News, is very much a republican sided source and, CNN and basically every other news channel on TV is directed to democratic viewers. On the internet, as shown in the TED video, different people received different results from the same search. This isn't right because people should be entitled to their own opinions and the government shouldn't have control of filtering algorithms. I believe this because as citizens in a democracy we need to be able to see all sides of different issues so we can form our own opinions. The government restricting what we can see on the web isn't just, and it restricts the people from truly seeing all the points of a certain subject. I agree with Colton on the fact that search engines such as, Google and Yahoo, or even Facebook, should have a preference button so nobody is restricted to any information given on the internet.

Major websites such as google, facebook and yahoo control what we see by monitoring what links we click on most and by the things we show interest in. These companies then edit all the potential information we could get and filter out the information they don’t think we want to see. In other words someone who searches lots of republican viewpoints will get completely different google results than someone who mainly searches for democratic viewpoints. This means that sites such as google will control what you see based of your political belief. This is a very corrupt system because it doesn’t expose us to other viewpoints and other things just because we haven’t looked at it as much as another thing. In some sense ted is exactly right when he say’s he we are back in 1915. What he is trying to say is that because of this screening of the information provided online we are being restricted of seeing other ideas and world affairs that “google might not want us to see.” In some sense it makes everyone more naïve and ignorant. The government should definitely set restrictions on the screening companies are using because it isn’t giving things that we “don’t want to see” its making us oblivious to other peoples views and opinions just because we haveny searched things similar. Its like being told a story but someone selectively telling you what they think you want to hear. Although these sites are only trying to make the internet more enjoyable for us as people, we still need exposure to things we might not like

Similar to Pariser's naïve opinion of the Internet during adolescence, I was unaware of the algorithmic filtering issue of modern day's search engines and social networking sites until this video was brought to my attention. Although some may argue that tailoring and personalizing Google searches and the Facebook newsfeed is preferable, it's hindering the expansion of knowledge on a broad variety of topics, specifically current events, for many Americans. For example, Pariser displays two of his friend's results after searching 'Egypt' in the midst of the revolution. Although both Daniel and Scott searched identical topics, the results are significantly different. As discussed in class, it is considerably important to be aware of modern issues and events in order to be a productive and responsible citizen of the United States. In addition, altering search engines can create dangerous narrow-mindedness. A likely situation would presumably occur when electing a new officer for a position, whether it is minor or major. During student elections at Parish, every candidate is given the opportunity to prepare a speech to perform in front of the class. It is not until every candidate has finished speaking that classmates can finalize their votes. This practices fairness and equality as well as creating an open mind in each of the students. Rather than deciding the vote based simply upon friendships, each student must listen to each candidate in order to gain perspective, much like we should do when researching any range of topics. To summarize, algorithmic filtering on the Internet can obstruct our ability to look at all sides of any occurrence in the media, which is essential in forming an opinion.

After watching the TED video in class, I realized how much more technology is still evolving and growing on the day to day basis. Not all of this, however, is toward a positive direction. Learning that Google and other major search engines are now controlling what we can see on the internet based on pages and sites that we have previously viewed is not right in my opinion. This new type of search engine is blindfolding the public to the rest of the world and important new events and polices that are occurring. It’s comparable to an over protective parent shielding their child from the terrible things that happen in the real world. Instead of changing what we can view, search engines need to continue to make advances in how easy it is to view multiple resources and not just cut people off from viewing certain websites and articles. The internet is a way for the public to express their opinion to a much larger audience and this is now becoming much harder to do. The government needs to step in and argue that these new search engines are violating the peoples’ freedom of speech. Why should Google be able to control who can see what opinions I post on blogs and websites?

In the TED talk, Eli Pariser informed and showed us how many of the top internet sites are using algorithms to filter information to fit our “interests”. This idea sounds good on paper because most people don’t want to see stuff that isn’t relevant to them, but what this is actually doing is shielding us from certain information that the computer thinks that we wouldn’t want to see. I disagree with this policy because how would it know what we want to see if it filters out the information that we haven’t seen before. This can distort or change people’s views of current events and news because they are only seeing one side of the story, based on the computers assumptions on their political views and personality. Another question arises when this issue is looked at, should the government step in and stop the filtering of information? One could argue that the government has no right to control what websites show you and it is the internet’s freedom of speech. On the other hand, what gives the websites the right to control what you see on the internet, although it is technically their website and they’re just trying to better your internet experience, I strongly disagree with they’re filtering and I think they should take it upon themselves to do the right thing and allow the same access of information to everyone.-Jack Leonard

Whether it is okay or not if you are only seeing articles, ads, etc. that mirror your political beliefs, I don’t think is relevant in what the topic of the TED talk is about. But, in my opinion I feel that Google and other search engines could be stereotyping people by using the information they get to choose what to be first on the page. It can also be a useful too though. In some cases you could end up with exactly what you were searching for and in other cases it might not help at all. After listening to the talk he mentioned that two of his friends got completely different results when searching “Egypt”, this could be because of the search engine guessing by standards but also Egypt is such a big topic. I bet if they were to search in more detail, that their results would be the same.

In the TED movie, we saw how different algorithms affect our technological world now-a-days. With multiple social websites now that affect the way we see the world, these algorithms have already filtered out information we wouldn't have interest in. This idea sounds intriguing to many people when they're first introduced to this idea. What you don't realize is that a lot of information relating to the world is alienated from important news that people may never see because of the "bubble." I think this policy is bad for us, citizens, because how do these certain algorithms know what we do and don't want to see. People will become less informed with certain information because they're being shielded away from the other side of the story, for instance a political race and a republican not seeing the democrats’' point of view for a certain topic. Depending what you feel on this issue, you have to ask yourself should the government be doing anything by moderating this algorithm. One’s side could be that the government has no business viewing our personal life and would be violating our citizen's rights, but others might believe that they should alter this algorithm so we, Americans, can become more diverse with our views.

I was intrigued with the TED video we watched in class. I was not aware there was a filter bubble. I don’t think the government should have the authority to filter the articles on the search engines. I think we should be open to the broadest search for the articles we intend to search for. At times, I would understand why the articles would be filtered. Maybe, you wanted to just see an article mirrored to your likes, such as in Facebook. I agree that filtering would be helpful for Facebook. People don’t want to know about everyone’s business. They usually just want to be kept updated with their closer friend’s statuses. I think filtering would be fast and sufficient for the Facebook program. However, sometimes when looking into politics you would need the broadest search. This is why, in general, the articles shouldn’t be filtered. This new “filter bubble” could affect several things. It could affect voting. If you only see republican ads, then you won’t know the democratic side of the poll, or vice-versa. In order to be a good citizen and be kept updated to the politics in today’s world we need to be shown all the types of ads. We need to be informed of everything that is happening. With the “filter bubble” we are restricted and limited to the information we need to know.

In the Ted movie, I learned that many big internet companies have a filter bubble. This filter put in ads and articles about your political views. I think it is not right because there could be searching Africa diamonds and not see how they get those diamonds and what they are for. So many things can get filtered out of your life. If you have different views than other people your searches are not even close to the same. I don’t think we should have a filter because it doesn’t show what is really happening in our world. It shows people what they really what to know. If it stays that way people will not know if a war is going on, or if the economy if doing badly. Filtering could end up very badly if they continue to do it. Eventually people will find out about it and get fairly angry at the internet companies epically Google. Google does it the worst they change what one looks up just like ted said. Ted said when people searched things like Egypt they showed up differently because of their beliefs and how they search.Blake Ransom

I have seen TED videos before and I think that he brings many good points to light. I had never realized that so many sites tailor what you see based on many factors that we have no control of; I was shocked. We should be allowed to gather the same information that is obtainable. If each of these sites only allows us to see certain things then we automatically close our minds to the other options available because we didn’t even have to chance to see them and make our opinion that they were not valuable to us. The web has already decided what to we need to view and see when as knowledgeable citizens we should have all the unaltered information available to us and be able to chose ourselves what information we want to draw and retain from what is given to us not to have the decision of what we retain already picked.

When we watched the TED video filter bubbles on the internet, it caught my interest very immensely. The first thing that came to my mind was how many people actually know this is happening to them when they are searching the web. I had literally no idea that my web was being filtered through the places I sit, things I search, and links I click on. I believe as someone said in my class period that the government should influence on Google, Yahoo and others a switch that decides if you would like to use the filter or not. This would be very helpful in the fact that it certainly can be useful. But also, when people’s searches are getting filtered it is showing what people want to see, not what is actually happening in the real world. People need to know what is happening all over the world in my opinion. This problem needs to be fixed soon and I think the government would be able to do the job if it was brought to them. Going back to my first point I believe people need to be informed that they are being filtered before the problem is resolved. Luke Hoyl

In the TED movie, the internet is overall described as a convenient, popular, and mainly a great source for meeting people, finding information, and also for communication. However, the sites we used the most, such as Facebook, Google, and Yahoo News, are being tampered with. Your search results and surrounding information from these sites correspond to your recent and most common habits on the computer, and also to the ideas that you click on first or the most frequently. This puts you in what in the TED video is called a filter bubble. This filter bubble filters you and isolates you away from everything on the internet. For example, if you were a Republican and searched about republican ideas and only look at republican sites, your search results will never show anything that has to do with Democrats. This is not a good thing because you’re isolated from other views, which to have good knowledge about an issue on hand; you need to know your side as well as your opponents. Also if something important happens on the democratic side that would affect you or the Republican Party you wouldn’t know because that search result was filtered outAndrew Boyd

The Internet right now is a huge part of the people worldwide and I feel like it will always be or at least for the time being. I feel that the speaker in the Ted video really had done his research on Internet filtering. I feel that the people should have a choice if they want there filter bubble on or off. For example Google should just put a switch that turns it on and off depending on the users preferences. To get this accomplished I don’t think that the government should get involved because they will sway the opinions of the people using it. Many people would be surprised and interested in the information that they would be exposed to if they had their filter bubble off. People could never be exposed to major world news if they aren’t shown it without searching for it as an example of yahoos main news page. In conclusion I think that the providers (Google, yahoo, facebook, ECT) should be responsible for making it an option for the user to choose weather or not they would like there filtering bubble to be on.

Until I saw this video I was completely unaware of online editing. I found it interesting that you and somebody else can get online at the same exact time, search the same thing and both get completely different results. Robots filter our computers and are creating boundaries for what we view on Facebook, Twitter, search engine and social media. I don’t find the personalized filtering fair to individuals. Some people might see something that another person would never view because it’s not suitable to their filter bubble. Elements of a filter bubble are location, past searches, server or even they’re computer. Being shown what the computer wants us to see and not what we need to see can detrimental to research done by people around the world. If this is how our society is going to function then I believe that everyone should have the right to know.

I agree with most of what Eli Pariser had said in the TED video but I think that if you look at the reality in what is going on in our generation, it might be hard to change the ways of the internet. Most people in this generation do not want to be forced to read or look at something they disagree with or are not interested it. In my opinion I think most people would ignore the other beliefs or outlooks on life if they are not drawn to it. Even when I am on Yahoo, Facebook, or Google, I find myself overlooking most things unless they catch my attention in something I like or am interested in. I feel that we should be more interested in other beliefs and things we may be uncomfortable with that are going on in the world. The fact is that most people nowadays would rather spend their time looking at something they are interested in. If they are shown something that is against their political or religious beliefs they will most likely ignore it. I feel that most people who browse on the internet wanted to look at something other than their specific beliefs than they would search for it on their own. If more people would be more interested in other things besides their own beliefs and would venture outside of their comfort zones, the people of the world would be more accepting in different beliefs. -Julie W.

Before watching Eli Pariser’s TED presentation, I had no idea that the Internet was tailoring each persons’ search query specifically to that person’s interests, location, etc. In some respects, I think that this is beneficial in today’s society, but as a whole, it’s quite the opposite. When things are filtered for each person, it’s almost like keeping information that may be interesting or insightful from someone. I wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s like lying, but it kind of falls under the whole “the truth hurts” category. For instance, if a strong liberal were to search something on a topic of the presidential election or some other part of the government, if what Pariser said is absolutely true, he or she would only receive information in favor of a liberal view of things. This completely eliminates any possibility of possible swaying said person to conservative. I’m not saying if all the information was given, he or she would sway conservative, but I am saying that as a whole, the Internet is beginning to somewhat force people in one direction or the other, there is no neutral. It’s somewhat hard to put into words, but I basically feel like the Internet is beginning to filter things out that may prove beneficial in one’s thoughts/feelings on his or her political standpoint.Ryan R.

I do not believe it is fair for websites such as Google, Yahoo, and other websites to refine our searches down into a "filter bubble" designed to our liking. These websites use the links we click on every day and other ways to detail our searches. I believe this unjust and it must be stopped. As said in the video, one of the men who searched Egypt saw no results about the uprising in Egypt which occurred that same day. It's astounding that to hear about this, for Google especially, because these algorithms being made to control the filter bubbles could eventually even smaller bubbles and smaller results. Where does it end? Also, I believe everyone has the right to see the same information when googling the same way. If you have been brought up to a certain political or theoretical belief and when you search that subject, all the results are biased to your beliefs and everything you disagree with has been pushed to the bottom. This is certainly a disadvantage to the upcoming generation who depends very heavily on using the Internet every day. Even when researching for a project, the results could be skewed in a different direction because of your previous beliefs. Using these filter bubbles and algorithms to determine the results when searching on Google and other sites is unfair and hopefully does not constrict the results even tighter.

Technology is advancing more and more rapidly, often making tasks more simple and all around easier. However, when is it important to be challenged? Powerhouse companies like Facebook and Google are using this new technology to edit the information they present based on previous searches. This is unfortunate because these filters only show what people want to see, not necessarily what people need to see. In order to form a well rounded opinion it is important to understand all views of a topic. Even if you have a previous opinion, it is important to be able to readdress the facts and challenge you’r outlook. If people are more knowledgable of views other than their own, it makes for a better functioning community. Of course this technology can be helpful, which is why I think people should be able to decide whether or not the “filter bubble” is on. While I think people should get the choice, I don’t think it should be up to the government to enforce it. It would be a very minor change that would only help and not impede on the average person’s internet experience. This would be an easy change that would stop the internet from isolating groups.

After watching the TED video I couldn't help but go home and try out the same search keyword on the different computers in my household. I am astonished by the difference between the results my family member's computers have come back with. While clicking through the pages, I found things I was interested in on my parents computers as well. To think that a "filter bubble" could possibly be stunting the growth of my interests worries me. If I had never been exposed to links found on a computer other than my own, I wouldn't have learned nearly as much. Perhaps the bubble is there to seemingly speed along our day and cut down the time it takes for us to sorta through what information we want to look into and what we don't. But it is also cutting down on the crucial diversity of opinions and ideas we are seeing. These algorithms that were created to help us limit the full potential of the internet, they are creating a more tailored and biased view of webpages for citizens using the World Wide Web. A simple solution to any controversy over these filters would be an option to shut them off.

I believe that the internet should not be allowed to tailor to our own political beliefs. This is because there is always more than one version of a story; thus if only our own beliefs were shown, we would not get the entire picture. In fact, as the video had stated, we would not even know we were missing pieces of a puzzle.

It is like presenting options “a” and “b”, but not mentioning “c” or “d”. If the majority of the population was not informed of all the choices, they would not be happy. They would want to know that there were other options available besides “a” or “b”. If the internet filters what we are able to see, we wouldn’t be able to change our opinions if we didn’t know there were other opinions.

This filter is limiting, not allowing the chance of becoming “enlightened”. Even if one does not change their opinion, at least they have a better understanding of the opposition. There is no way to fully understand one’s position on a certain topic if they do not know how to oppose the argument. The internet is tailoring websites to our political interests is hindering us- not only in understanding the entire story, but in understanding our thoughts.Kianna S

In society today it is a constant war going on in the backgrounds that we don't see, and it's over which party can pay which news group to report our news in a way that makes them seem superior to other parties. I think a filter should not be in place it allows us to see everything in all different views making our opinions of things much more broad. By putting a filter on the internet just restricts the knowledge that we gain and doesn't benefit us because we will only see news based on what the government thinks we should see. The government shouldn't be able to form any kind of opinion for us even thought they try to push us in certain directions with ads and commercials. One should only form an opinion after knowing all the facts that pertain to the subject, and especially in government. If government really wanted what was best for our country then they would leave our sources of information alone so the the citizens could make the best evaluation and do what's best for the country. Technology is advancing at a rapid rate and is as strong as ever and depending on what the people see will change things in our country.

Before watching this video, it didn’t even cross my mind that the government could be regulating and changing what we see on the Internet. Maybe they are just trying to help, but I don’t think that they should have any input to what we are seeing or how we are seeing it. Like others said, the government only giving you what they think you want to see could be beneficial, but it keeps you from seeing other peoples’ views and from seeing how other people see things. How can you possible determine your views and your beliefs if you can’t see both sides of the situation? For instance, Eli Pariser said that he was looking at most of the Liberal posts and they completely edited out the Conservative posts. What if he was using these posts as a source of finding out more about both sides? Maybe he was more interested in the Liberal posts, but maybe he wasn’t. How is someone else supposed to determine what you want to see without any input from you except that you look at something more than something else? On Pariser’s blog he says that no one was going to a certain page from Yahoo, yet the government thought it should still show up at least once on everyone’s page. He says that “Some stories, the editors say, everyone simply needs to see.” How could they possible make that determination for someone that they know close to nothing about? This is what it comes down to, I think. The question: How would they know?

Watching Eli Pariser's TED presentation was an eye-opening experience. Before I saw this video, if someone said the words "filter bubble" or "algorithm" I would have no idea what they were talking about. The only similar story I'd heard was about the government filtering China's web bases with the purpose of denying the people the ability to see whatnis going on in the world outside of China. They do this to prevent their people from wanting change or from realizing the restrictions the government places on them. Although these two situations are relatively different, seeing that in China the filtering is done intentionally and for --- purposes and in the U.S. all that has occurred is a technical error, the overall concept is the same: We are both being forced to see one side to the story or one specific view to life. This can come to create a huge problem. It is contributing to the reason people can be so stubborn in only believing what they were originally told to believe. Say a 15-year-old, who's parents are both democrats, goes on his dad's computer and types in the word "government." Because of his dad's google history, the kid may only get results favoring the democratic side of politics. He may never even see the republican side. Switch the story around, replacing the kid with a 15-year-old who's family is republican-based, and you get the same outcome vice versa. This is just one example of the many ways these "filter bubbles" are affecting our society. It is extremely important to always listen to both sides of an argument or issue before deciding which half to believe. With the algorithms censoring out information it has decided we just don't want to see, we never see the other side to things and can't possibly have a fair, educated view on important issues such as politics.-Morgan C.

Before watching the TED video i was completely unaware of even the possibility that the government could be regulating our search engines and our preferences on our computers. In our generation people tend to ignore what does not interest them therefore ignoring anyone or anything that doesn't agree with their opinions, likes, or dislikes. I agree with what Eli Pariser said in the video. It is definitely wrong for any government to regulate ANYTHING the people do for personal pleasure or interest much less a government that claims to be 100% democratic. Every person in America has the right to privacy without government interference, That is one thing that America prides itself on. If our government is not holding that true then we are on a quick downward slope to a dictatorship. "Land of the free and home of the brave" are words that define America and our unique governmental customs. Part of being the land of the free is being free to speak, think, and act however you want. No form of government oppression to the point of regulating what it's people see while looking up "Egypt" on Google will ever survive very long. Like i said before, regulating things like that is putting us on a fast track to a dictatorship and a dictator will be the death of America.

The internet is a great tool for finding information, however it is inherently flawed because it only shows the user what they search for and what they want to see. This can make it easy for people to put themselves in a bubble, only ever looking at things that they support or are interested in. Although this appeals to some, it does not allow for personal growth or educated opinions on a subject. Especially in politics, a person can never fully understand anything until they know all sides of the story. People need to become more responsible with how they research by using multiple websites with different political affiliations to look up local and world events, politicians and what they stand for, and issues that they may not be comfortable with. If people are concerned with websites’ algorithms limiting the information available to them then they should join together with people who share that belief and bring it up to the company themselves. There is no need for the government to involve themselves in the designing of a company’s website, as that is not the government’s place and could end in the government altering the algorithms themselves to promote specific ideas and opinions. Morgan K

Before watching the TED video i had no idea the internet was giving customized results. I had never even heard of it or heard of Eli Pariser, so i am sure a lot of other people haven't heard about any of the disagreements yet as well. After watching i believe people need to know they have options and should be able to choose when to turn it off and to turn it on. At the same time if i were doing research for a project and using the internet i would want the internet to block all the useless information and not have an overflow, but then also be able to break the bubble. I don't think the government should control what people get to see when they search. I don't understand why they would be wasting time on something they shouldn't even care about. I think people should have their own control of what they see and i think it would be useful for the age differences that all use the internet. I defiantly believe it will help more than hurt. -Megan Reynolds

As seen in the TED video, the government is becoming more involved in our internet and media. The video explains how internet sites such as yahoo, Google, and facebook are altering their websites in a process known as “filtering”. Yahoo, Google, and facebook determine what to filter based on location, and previous websites visited on your browser. As of right now I believe that is it ok for the government to control what shows up on our searches and on our browsers. This process known as filtering can be helpful when you are trying to search certain topics. Based on your interests and previous searches you will be given a helpful list of sites that pertain to you. However on the other side, some people may argue that it is inconvenient in the case of politics, because a republican would only have opinions pertaining to republicans in their search. I believe in this scenario, if a person would like to become more knowledgeable on certain topics they can search something along the lines of opposing viewpoints in the certain topic they would like to learn about. I do believe that the government should set the guidelines for the information being filtered and also inform the people that this filtering is taking place, because many people may not be aware the information there are being shown in filtered. Overall, I think the filtering process can save people valuable time and make the internet easier to use, but it is possible in the future it could turn into a negative thing. cate c

I do believe that it is okay to see articles that mirror a person’s political beliefs. Saying that, I think it should be an option rather than it automatically happening. Even though the Internet sites like Google are using these special algorithms to filter search results, it doesn’t mean it’s right. The main problem that filtering is happening without most of the public being aware of it. The Internet should be a public source of information that everyone one should view the same way. The people need to be able to view all points of view so the public knows what the entire world is thinking, opposed to just one person’s beliefs. The issue may seem small, but it is not. Even though it pleases the user to see what he wants, it is ignorant and wrong to keep opposing ideas away. Without viewing contrasting points, the Internet would become useless and not trustworthy as a source. Companies along with people tend to follow the leader or the bigs. In this case, a line is being crossed. The Internet and algorithms do not run the world, humans do. I feel it is time to stand up to the major Internet sites such as Google, Yahoo, and Facebook and stop this mess before it gets too big.

I believe it is not ok to just see the articles that mirror who we are. We as citizens have the right to know what is going in our country and the world because there are situations that could really affect us as individuals. It is true what Mr. Pariser says, when I get on youtube or google, I get suggestions that are related to what I have seen before. Maybe algorithms are just doing their job or maybe we, ourselves, are not that interested to even search anything outside of our interests. The internet is very useful and it is a blessing we have since many other countries do not have the ability or sometimes freedom to use it. However, some Americans do not use the internet wisely so what chance is there that we will know what our country proposes for our human lives? It’s not right that we should only see what interests us, but we need the step up our game and look for ourselves what we should get to know. Articles and other media information is the key to our government to help us. The internet world has grown so much but that doesn’t mean we can’t control what we search. -Daniela Ramirez

As we saw from the Ted video the Internet is changing dramatically. Ted was speaking about how facebook blocked his friends they didn’t value the same political beliefs he did. I feel that the Internet is now being used negatively more then positively. So the over all question you ask yourself …Is it ok if you are only seeing articles, ads, ect that mirror your political beliefs? If not should the government get involved, setting guidelines for filtering algorithms on the Internet?Me personally think people should have the right to view whatever they want. I feel that if someone wanted to branch out and seek for something outside of their political beliefs, they should be able to do so. I do not think the government should set guidelines for filtering algorithms on the Internet because I feel like it would cause more unnecessary problems that can easily be avoided. If anything I think the government should try and stop the filtering. This could be stopped if only more people were informed about the problem. This is mainly the reason why many things are not fixed today, because the citizens don’t really know what is going on. I feel as if people knew and had a say about certain things, these problems would be taken care of. ;)

As someone who Uses Netflix and google religiously, I have noticed this "filter" before. To many, it seems like this filter is extremely annoying; but to others, it's extremely convenient. It seems as if these algorithms just assume it knows what you want to see, pulling up movies, news, and in some cases pictures. While this can be convenient for some people just looking around, it's also hurtful when spreading other news and things that are important. Most sites like google and Facebook have settings that help customize your online experience, but what needs to happen is making it an option to use the filter or to not use the filter. Although it may create hassle for those working on the site, it seems almost vital to make this an option to get out the right information. The government really needs to make this an important issue, especially as more and more important events happen everyday. Hopefully one day, people will have a choice of what they want to see and what they need to see, whether it's for just looking around on the internet or looking for serious information.

After watching Eli Pariser's video I was amazed that google, yahoo, and other search engines actually regulating and change what we are searching. I think this is wrong; these search engines shouldn't be able to refine our searches into this "filter bubble." The example Eli Pairiser uses is a very good example of how this "filter bubble" is affecting the views and knowledge of the people. He shows his two friend's searches of Egypt; one friends search shows the crisis in Egypt and the current protest. While his other friends search shows travel sites for Egypt and basic information about Egypt. This clearly shows how the second friend wouldn't even know about the protest and crisis that was currently happening in Egypt and only information about traveling and the basic information about Egypt. The way these companies filter our searches controls the way we think. They are keeping us from discovering new ideas , instead they filter our searches according to what we have looked up in the past. These companies are trying to make things easier on people; they are trying to make things faster so instead of going through many links to find what we want, we find it right away. Although this could be hurting the growth of knowledge, people don't see the other side of things. People have the right to see everything that is going on, and these new technologies are restricting the many ideas that are given through the internet. This new technology can seriously change the way people look at politics, and other important news.

Watching this short 9 minute video by Eli Pariser on “Filter Bubbles” literally blew my mind. Before seeing this video I had no idea that what he was talking about was even possible. I literally had no idea that algorithms could manipulate and change what we see when using search engines like Google, and even Facebook. I had no idea that anyone had the authority to do this nor did I know that Facebook was smart enough to sort my interests and pull up links that it thinks I would be more interested in. Maybe these search engines are trying to do us a favor by limiting what we see on the World Wide Web. Maybe the people behind these algorithms in a way are using these manipulating tactics to try and shelter us from what actual devastations are going on all over the world. What I thought was most interesting about the video is when Eli Pariser asked many of his different friends to Google the same topic, Egypt and see what they came up with. On one side, one of his friends on his first page of results from Google came up topics of crisis and protests in Egypt while the other friend came up with vacation spots and daily news. I must admit when I got home from school I was very intrigued to see what I would find when Googling Egypt. When I searched Egypt I came up with links on Ancient Egypt and daily news in Egypt. I just think it is crazy how these algorithms can manipulates what you see on these search engines, and it makes me wonder what else could be manipulated.

After watching this TED video, my view on the internet changed dramatically. In the video, Eli Pariser talked about how Google, Facebook, and Yahoo filters what you view on the internet based on your location, previous searches, etc. Before watching this video, I was completely unaware of the “filter bubble”; I had no idea that this type of filtering was possible. I don’t see how the government even has the right to do something like this.. It’s very unjust if you think about it. They don’t even ask for your permission to sort through your results. I don’t think it’s right for the government to filter what we see on the internet just based on previous searches for example. People use the internet to research and learn about new things. Because the internet is filtering your search results, it lessens their ability to broaden their views on the topic because what shows up under say for example your parents search results, might not show up on yours. In politics, if all you search is republican views, because of this “filter bubble”, you might not have as much access to democratic views as the next person might be. I don’t agree with the use of the “filter bubble” because people should get the exact results they search for that are not filtered by any means. I can see how some people would like this though for Facebook because not everyone wants to be updated with photos or statuses from people they aren’t close with. I do believe that some people could see the use in this filter for Facebook and maybe other search engines, but they should be able to turn it off or on whenever they want.

In Eli Pariser's TED video, I was amazed to how little I knew about the changes going on with the search engines and the internet. Eli had some great key points and examples that I believe to be very true as well. The filtering of these social networking sites are truly preventing many facts and knowledge to the people. My initial thought towards this "filter bubble" was that it was clever, reading the advertisements and articles that I was interested in sounded appealing. As I thought through this more carefully though, this idea become less captivating. We the people would not be as informed and unable to broaden our thoughts, unable to change our political beliefs if wanted. These "filtering bubbles" are only showing us our views and not allowing them to be compared to others. In the end these "filtering bubbles" determine how people are going to vote and much more and quit possibly making us miss a very important announcement. This is a very big problem politically that the internet needs to get dilemma fixed. I do not think that government needs to set any policy's or become involved with setting guidelines for filtering algorithms. I think it would be best if we got to change the filtering ourselves.

As seen in the TED video, the Internet has vastly changed over the years. Major websites such as Google, Facebook, Yahoo, and Netflix have been using computerized algorithms in at attempt to personalize the Internet. While the idea seems harmless at a glance, what these algorithms are really doing is disabling people from seeing all sides of the stories. Government should not have the power to regulate what news can be and cannot be seen by Americans. It is impossible for people to determine what they truly believe in if they are only given a certain selection of ideas to view. If the “filter bubble” that surrounds us keeps growing, the government will essentially gain the power to shape our beliefs by providing us with only the information they choose to share. The idea of personalizing the internet could be a very good idea for more convenient searching experience, but only if the option to have unfiltered searches is still available.

I’m a tech-geek so I know quite a bit about the world-wide web and about Facebook. I actually did know that Facebook conducts its searches based on your previous explorations, what I did not know, is that Google, Yahoo!, etc. do the same. For example, on Facebook, the ads that pop up on the side bar are based on what you have ‘Liked’ and what’s under your ‘Interests’ section on your profile. Part of me thinks it is in fact a great idea to filter our results so we don’t see anything that wouldn’t necessarily spark our interest or be what we are particularly looking for. On the other hand, part of me disagrees with the whole concept of the “filter bubble”. Although it may make it easier to do research more efficiently, it essentially gives the government more power to transform our beliefs and opinions by strictly giving us the information they want us to share. I personally do not think the government has any business controlling the filtering of our searches. I think it would be better if we got the chance to change our filters based upon what interests us the most.

I believe that Eli Pariser’s talk reveals a very important point that we as a society must not only consider but must act upon. His presentation shows us the extent of the controlling power that the entertainment and news companies have over the public. It shows us the true extent of how our view points, political as well as social, can be swayed just by what we read. Consider the fact that Google, Facebook, or Bing could potentially be used as tools by things such as presidential campaigns to change the public’s idea of certain current events. We wouldn’t even know it, but our freedom to think freely and would be being taken from us. The original gift that the internet was meant to be would be lost and replace by a manipulating devise, wielded by the companies that control the search engines. Considering the potential consequences of the continuing free range of these destructive machines called filtering algorithms I think that it is not a question of if the government should put a leash on these companies, they must. As a government it is there responsibility to continue to protect and follow the freedoms that were set out by America’s founding fathers. Right now these freedoms are being threatened by these algorithms and our government is the tool we need to halt this threat.

After viewing the TED video, I was shocked and dumbfounded. I was not aware that big internet companies such as Google, Facebook, Netflix, etc. were filtering what we view after a search. All of these companies are using computerized algorithms to personalize our search results to what they think best suits us. Why does this matter? These internet companies are basically only giving us one side of everything. These companies are looking at what we search and what we click on to determine which searches fit our best interests. I think this is terrible, the Internet was created to give individuals the power to see what they want, it hinders the ability of independence. It doesn't allow us to expand our knowledge onto newer and better things. Alot of information is being lost due to this device filtering our searches. The government should set up a policy to block filtering among companies. This could turn into a bigger problem as time goes on. As Americans we have freedom to see what we want and not have someone control it for us. Setting forth a law to stop this outrage is the only way it will stop.

Honestly I spend enough time on the computer to make the judgments about what I feel like seeing . Sometimes when I’m on Youtube or facebook I see these filters that Eli Pariser's TED video speaks on. To an extent it doesn’t bother me because if you are on certain websites like YouTube and all I’m looking up is Gospel music you probably aren’t going to filter in videos of people shooting at each other or street fighting. On the political side of that argument I don’t think this filter bubble should exist because if you don’t understand the other sides argument and there position on the subject how can you argue effectively. No I don’t believe the Government should set restrictions on these bubble because honestly people in our world should just get their education and make their own judgments and understandings on their own ideas. If we don’t go and educate ourselves it’s like we are putting ourselves back into slavery because we still will have to worry about “the man” telling what is right and wrong, and that will be the downfall of us as an educated community.Eugene l

After watching the TED video I was shocked that something such as a regulated Internet was happening in the United States. First of all I don’t think anyone or any organization should have the control to decide what I should read on the Internet. I agree with Eli Pariser, “that the internet is our connection to the world.” However, that connection should include many viewpoints if it is regarding something political so I can make an intelligent decision based on the differing views. If I am using the Internet for research, I certainly do not want to be given only the information that Google or Yahoo “thinks” I would want be familiar with. I do not at all like this idea of personalization and that people have power over what I’m able to view. How can I grow and learn if there is a filter on the information that I am able to see? It almost seems that if we are not careful, this entire situation could quickly get out of hand making the Internet similar to a dictator. We would then be at their mercy only learning what that wanted us to know. That is a very scary, likely possibility if filtering is not stopped. The junk information needs to be controlled, but what is junk to me might be important information to someone else. I want to be exposed to information around the world, like Pariser says even if it is “uncomfortable and challenging.”

I gained a completely new view of Google and other major Internet complanies after watching the TED video over the "Filter Bubble." I was shocked that the Internet, a tool that is meant for limitless possibilities, is now withholding information from the user. This information is even being held without knowledge or permission from users, including myself. I find this disturbing and something that needs to be changed. This is America in the 21st century and while everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs, everyone needs to be shown a different perspective. This perspective doesn’t necessarily have to be shoved down the reader’s throats, but it at least needs to be seen. Ideas and beliefs are subject to change, just because I search things that don’t have to do with politics and world issues, doesn’t mean that they should be filtered from my browser. If we are only shown our own views over and over again, there will be no progress or evolution in our beliefs. Without this, it will be hard to learn anything new and that’s what, I feel like, the Internet is all about. I feel that filtering on these sites is completely going against the purpose of the Internet and that it should be changed, or we should at least be given the option to turn filtering off.

1) Is it okay if you are only seeing articles, ads, etc. that mirror your political beliefs?In my opinion, it is not okay to have people only see articles that mirror their political beliefs. As a responsible citizen, it is the person’s civic responsibility to know the issues at hand, understand them and be informed about arguments regarding solutions to problems. I would also be concerned about the integrity and independence of the media if the issues are inadequately presented. If only one viewpoint is presented, there may be censorship or suppression, hence propaganda. In order to have a reasoned argument, it is necessary to have correct information, and an understanding of the diversity of arguments expressed. When a search engine is customizing the information displayed to each client based on his or her history and environment, they will only receive information that supports their preconceived notions. This only produces isolation and polarization of thought on important issues.

2) Do we need a policy? Should government set guidelines for filtering algorithms on the Internet?I do not believe that the government should get involved in regulating the media. If the government had that power, it could be used in a productive, fair, and equitable manner. However, the government would also have the ability to control the flow of information in the media. This could be a very bad thing, as historically many governments had the media at their disposal and have misused their power to suit their own agenda. We are much better off with a media that is completely free and independent from any government regulation or interference. However, the public should be educated regarding the potential biases to information presented to them through Internet searches, especially on political matters.

After watching the TED video on the "Filter Bubble", I was very surprised with how the internet secretly blocks out ads or links that are opposite to our frequent searches. I believe people have the right to look at anything they please whether that person agrees with it or not. Although many people aren't well aware of the personal searches, I think the government shouldn't take part in action yet. However, in the future if this is still a problem the government should ban websites from doing this without the users permission. For example, in the video, when Egypt was searched by two people they received polar opposite results. This search made me realize that it's almost unfair to the users. They are cheated out on information they might care to view. Also, I believe people should be able to read opinions and ideas of all points of view, not just one. The unfair part remains in that the majority of computer users do not know that their searches are narrowed to their views and common searches. I believe that if the users are not allowed permission for the blocking of their searches, then the government has the right to become involved.Lauren Chilton

After watching the TED video over the “filter bubble” I have gained knowledge that some of the largest companies in America can control exactly what, where, and when I can access news. After learning this I began to wonder why such companies as Google, Yahoo, and even Facebook think they have the audacity to decide what I need to know. I believe that every day the human mind needs to be challenged and even defeated for one to truly decide what they believe in. For instance, picture if there was only one news station and they controlled exactly what you knew so they could decide what type of citizen you are for “your own good”. Not to sound harsh, but that is starting to happen today with millions logged on to their Facebook wall, or their yahoo mail. The reader can almost always expect to be spoon fed news that does not disturb them, but rather keep them comatose about their world. History teaches us that conformism leads to fascism while skeptical intelligent analysis leads to great democracies, which one sounds better? Modern day readers must realize a few facts about internet websites, they want your money, they want to keep you interested in their page to keep your money, and lastly they really have no care about you as an individual. In conclusion, don’t just take my advice on this information, look into it yourself, just please don’t buy in to these fascists who want you to stay comatose!

I think this TED video raises an important issue in the way we see things today. I get most of my information from the internet so its scary to know my source of news can be sided to a particular side. I agree that I would like to read about things that interests me but there needs to be a fair balance. I think it could be an issue if one day everyones opinions are sided of those from Google. It seems like a cheap way for a corporation to get what they want from the people and possibly the government. News today sides towards a certain opinion especially in politics but the safety in the news is everyone gets the same story. With this new "tailored" google results, Google can basically make up people's minds individually. I agree with the TED speaker, there should be a blend of your interests along with subjects you are not interested in.

After watching the TED video by Eli Pariser on “ Filter Bubbles” my mind was completely blown away. Before watching this video I had no earthly clue that what Eli said was even going on, or even possible. My first response to this video was “what, what is going on, does this really happen?” Now I am amazed that Google, facebook, yahoo, and other search engines pick and change what we are searching. I personally think that this is wrong. People in the world deserve and need to see everything that is going on because there are situations that could dramatically affect our lives. There are people who find the filters helpful and convenient. I have to say that sometimes it is nice to get help on something you are looking at or searching for. In most online sites there are personal settings that basically let you control what you want to do. What needs to happen is with in the settings of these sites needs to be an option to wear you can choose weather or not you would like to use the filter or not use the filter. Although this may seem to people as a minor issue, I feel that it is a major issue and something has to be done about it. Filters and algorithms should not be able to control or manipulate what you think, you should have that power. I hope that one day people will have the choice to see what they want to see, or see what they need to see. I now realize how much the Internet is changing and it makes me question, what else could change, what else could happen, could something go horribly wrong?

To me , i believe that the internet as a whole is trying to Horse-blind or tunnel-vision the world to only what they click on. I believe that the internet should give you a broader spectrum of what is really going on around you. If you click on things about Afghanistan and the war, then when you look up something about a diffrent country then it is going to give you information about the war that is going on in that country. America is a free country and the internet limiting what you see or taking away the things that you really dont look at is violating your rights as an American citizen. Just because you click on one thing and not the other does not mean that you dont care about that topic or that situation more , it is just what you feel like looking at, at that moment in time. I just feel it should be an individual's decision to filter out what they see on the internet, not a program or programmer's decision based on my daily routine of internet click's or usage. This to me are my beliefs and what i think about the TED speech.

in my opinion i believe that the internet is changing very quickly and tailoring to the individual and what they think that you want to see maybe sometimes instead of what is important and going on in the world we live in. I don't think that this is beneficial mainly because it's changing the point of view of the targeted audience. especially when it comes to important events in the world they sometimes might push that off to the side for more entertainment things like music, sports, etc. Especially when it comes to politics they can put certain ads on there that make their view very clear and make things one sided. so it will change how people look at things and in a sense brain wash them into thinking one sided so people don't form their own opinions on politics. as in the video they show an example of how two guys looked up egypt and they both got totally different things, so the internet puts on there what ever they want to. - Jeffery D

1. I enjoyed this video and believe what the websites are doing by filtering what you see shouldn’t be done. When a website filters what you see it prevents you from seeing sites that could allow you to learn things you could later be interested in. If websites begin filtering articles, videos, and other things related to politics it becomes bias and won’t allow you to know other peoples’ opinions. Even though the sites filter things so they only show what it thinks you’d enjoy, it prevents you from learning other issues and you also have no choice about which things are filtered out. This filtering should not be allowed. The video tells us the once these filters are in place you can no longer view are really decide the things you want to view. The filters should be removed and sites should allow the people the freedom to view what they want and maybe even chose what gets filtered out.

The “filter bubble” is an idea that I think I have been aware about for some time, but I haven’t truly had any thoughts about it or thought too much about it anyways. I do “surf the web” quite often and I have noticed that ads that are powered by Google usually have a strange relevance to what I have been recently researching. I just thought it was interesting that the Internet would provide ads that were relevant, but I had no idea when we typed in a subject in search engines that they would come up with personal results based on my location, computer, and prior searches. I do think this is a problem because we aren’t getting always getting results we are always looking for when we do Google searches. For example, lets say I want to do a search on cars. I may get results referring to purchasing a car, or I may get something relating to a car company who has been bailed out of debt all depending on where I am and what kind of searches I have made prior to this particular search. I don’t think that only seeing articles that relate to my political views is good because I am only seeing one side of the story and I will not be getting both sides to compare and contrast their differences. I believe that, in some instances, search results can be filtered depending on the simplicity of the search because if I just type GMC, I think that the first thing that should come up is their cars and company page, but if I add more to the search I think the filtering should remain to a minimum.

The TED talk we watched brought to light the “filter bubble” and its recent effects on society. This new "filter bubble" will have a bigger impact than people might think on the way one uses the Internet. Before when someone Googled any random word or phrase, a whole variety of links appeared and you could explore the Internet and go off on wild tangents. You could Google cars and end up looking at pictures of zoo animals. But now the filter bubble cuts down on time and curiosity, simply taking you directly where it thinks you'll get the most beneficial information such as ‘cars for sale in Dallas’. I went home and tried the Egypt experiment on our different household computers and it really does differ on every device. The ads that pop up on the side are relevant to where you live, your recent searches, hobbies...it's like the Internet knows you and this may be helpful to some but creepy and invasive to others. When I search something, I want the most direct answer or link to appear, not some website semi-related to what I searched. I think the filtering should be an option. You either want everything tailored to you or you'd prefer the broader World Wide Web. Either way, technology knows you and at this point there’s really no escaping it.

The idea of the “filter bubble” was discussed by Eli Pariser, and he showed how there are algorithms that change what we see in the internet. The “filter” shows the power or control that the people of these sites can determine what information we can or should see. Google and Facebook were his two main examples on different links/friends will show up for different people. This had never even occurred to me before the video, so I went home and googled Dallas Cowboys. The results of my computer were tickets and roster, while my mom’s was merchandise sell. That clearly shows how the bubble of what we see displayed by Pariser is actually true. This way our society should act upon getting rid of these “filter” algorithms because people should have their own ideas not the ones that our best suited for them. Part of being American is that we should see all the information we need and the “bubble” restricts what we can see. The government should act upon the companies and have the algorithms removed so we are not controlled by their views for us.

I believe that the Internet will always be heavily personized for each individual person. I also feel like the way the filters are used on google, is very similar to how our government works. Sometimes the government only tells us what we want to hear, instead of the truth. Sometimes this can be good, that way were not worrying about the bad things going on, but other times it can be bad because we don't know the whole story. For example, this past summer I was in Europe. Unlike the united states, the European media tells the full story, and I learned many new things about what was going in the Middle East. I was surprised because the news reporters joined the soldiers and broadcasted from the army camps, even while guns were being fired. The filter bubble that the government has, only tellls the what we want to hear.

I have thought a lot about the TED video that we watch during class. I believe that It is very important that we learn about how information on the internet is filtered because when we look something up on the internet we need to understand that we may only be getting one groups option on a topic. I believe that before using a search engine it should warn you that you might not be getting the same search results as someone else. I also think that these Algorithms that search engines use to personalize you search results are not very effective, this is because computers are used for many different things. Consider this you want to look up tickets to a concert to see how much they cost but later that day when you need to research Mexico for Spanish class you may get results for concerts in Mexico instead of other important information about the country. So, the algorithms used to personalize you searches can actually cause you to receive information that is not what you were actually searching for at all in the first place.

In the “filter bubble” video Ted conveys that the internet is filtering our websites, in result filtering us a people. He doesn’t think it’s very healthy to only be encountered with information that knows what you want to hear causing you to be oblivious to the other side of your interest or what’s outside your “filter bubble”. I agree a hundred percent with Ted; the filter bubbles can be harmful to anybody who has an opinion towards something. I think this is especially dangerous because the filtering is very subtle. This means no one knows it is even happening to them, so they couldn’t change the way they thought even if they wanted to. This filtering is causing everyone in our world to be single minded and ignorant towards numerous things. For example, say a republican searches Obama, he or she will receive information that most republicans want to hear, negative ones. Even though this feature is suppose to personalize and keep everyone more engrossed in what they search for, its causing us to not be able to learn by giving us only one mindset making us think we are always right. I am glad that not only I but everyone who watched the video is now aware of what’s happening, due to a big thanks to ted.

In the “filter bubble” video Ted conveys that the internet is filtering our websites, in result filtering us a people. He doesn’t think it’s very healthy to only be encountered with information that knows what you want to hear causing you to be oblivious to the other side of your interest or what’s outside your “filter bubble”. I agree a hundred percent with Ted; the filter bubbles can be harmful to anybody who has an opinion towards something. I think this is especially dangerous because the filtering is very subtle. This means no one knows it is even happening to them, so they couldn’t change the way they thought even if they wanted to. This filtering is causing everyone in our world to be single minded and ignorant towards numerous things. For example, say a republican searches Obama, he or she will receive information that most republicans want to hear, negative ones. Even though this feature is suppose to personalize and keep everyone more engrossed in what they search for, its causing us to not be able to learn by giving us only one mindset making us think we are always right. I am glad that not only I but everyone who watched the video is now aware of what’s happening, due to a big thanks to ted. -Tre V

In Eli Pariser's talk about the dangers of 'online filter bubbles', he explains how major companies like google and facebook 'edit' what we see online, taking several factors about ourselves to select preferences for what we see-without even consulting us. The problem is, though, if these companies do this, it significantly violates one of the rights of an American citizen: the freedom of speech, where a U.S. citizen decides what to think on his own. However, if the information the citizen is getting is 'edited' to show only one side of a political view, than that person will not know about the other side of the problem and be influenced, and therefore not able to speak their oppinion of the matter. Although, as far as we know, the government plays no role in this filtering, the internet deciding what we should see is not a good idea.

I don’t believe that it’s ok to only see things on the internet that mirror our personal beliefs and interests. If we don’t get exposed to different opinions and beliefs of other people, then we will become ignorant about the world around us. People need to learn about what’s happening in the world even though it may be depressing, violent, or upsetting. The internet should not be sheltering people from reality. Everything on the internet is so filtered to begin with that we usually don’t get the whole story when it comes to international news. If people start to only get news that is relevant to what they search on the internet, then how can they be expected to know about important things going on all around the world?

I do not believe that it is right for sites such as google, yahoo, and facebook to filter out certain websites just because of the computer I have, or what I have clicked on in the past. I don’t think that they should eliminate websites and articles just because the algorithms think that I don’t want to view it. I think it is very important as teenagers to get many different views because many teenagers automatically take the same political side as their parents. Before teenagers vote they should really get a wide view of ideas from both parties so they can make their own decisions

I do not believe that it is right for sites such as google, yahoo, and facebook to filter out certain websites just because of the computer I have, or what I have clicked on in the past. I don’t think that they should eliminate websites and articles just because the algorithms think that I don’t want to view it. I think it is very important as teenagers to get many different views because many teenagers automatically take the same political side as their parents. Before teenagers vote they should really get a wide view of ideas from both parties so they can make their own decisions

1) I personally do not think it is okay to see search results that mirror one's political beliefs. If this was to be done, the internet users would live in total ignorance of how the other political views are seeing certain topics. Also, in order to fully agree with a political side, one needs to know what they do not agree with on the opposing political side; by viewing only the search results supporting one's political beliefs, this would not be possible. 2) A policy set by the government is not necessary. Political views, let alone the government, should not be able to control our search engines.

Maria I said...I do not think its okay to only see search results that mirror our own political beliefs. The search results should also show information about the opposing political side so we know why we choose the political side that we favor. Also, when you are having discussions with people who choose a different political view than you did, you want to have facts on why your political view is better than the other persons and in order to do that you have to see search results about the other political view.

Eli Pariser on TED Talk made some very valid points and seems to have strong views about the Internet’s new, so called, “Filter Bubble”. He explains how major search engines and social networking sites are now using special algorithms to filter what you see, only showing what is most relevant to you based on things such as your past searches (that have been recorded). This concept, at first, really creeped me out. Then Eli brought politics into it, showing how this could, and possibly already is, affect our political world and potentially threaten our Democracy by not showing Internet users different political points of view. At this point, I was not only creeped out but also a little worried. Then I realized that this really isn’t a bad thing at all, this can actually be very helpful. It can expedite projects, getting rid of wasted time filtering thorough irrelevant posts. When I shop online, I’ve noticed it recommends (and very often accurately) things that I may like at the bottom of the page. And for that, I’m thankful. People seem to be freaking out over this Internet, so called, “Filter Bubble”, but the truth is that nobody ever promised the Internet would unite everyone in the world, and give everyone the perfect balance of information. It never has been and never will be. For the government to act out against these new algorithms in order to preserve the Democracy seems to be a communistic move, very hypocritical. As long as the word continues to spread of this new filtering, Internet users can surf the web with these filters in mind. I think these new algorithms are fair game for Google, Yahoo!, and etc.. It still seems a little bit creepy, but it’s not the end of the world.Catherine G

In my opinion, we do need a policy, but whether it should be set by the government or by the company is still to be determined. In many ways, it can be argued that the government should set limitations on how much the algorithms filter. They are supposed to be representing the people. The common folk should have faith that their government will do what’s right. But that is not often the case. They would limit certain values but not others, most likely forming some sort of propaganda. Not to mention that political views are certainly not unanimous in our government. Companies cannot be trusted to limit filtering either because they are all affected by the capitalist desire for wealth and money. Most likely they would say something along the lines of ‘the other companies will do that so we don’t have to.’ So any large group of people would be bias.

The only other option is for the people to choose for themselves. And of course there are problems with this too. Who is going to educate the people about what is going on? Some people might choose to have a filter bubble, which in my opinion is wrong. There is a difference between what you want and what you need.

There are many different problems with a policy, but we should still have one, even if that means no filters at all.

In my opinion, I am stuck between opposing sides. It is difficult to say whether algorithms are right or wrong. Even if they are wrong, there is not much we can do about it. If the government makes some sort of policy, it would be too controlling. But if the businesses make a policy, how could we be called a Democracy? One branch of people making the major decisions and policies is not a part of the government that the US was founded upon. In conclusion, it is difficult to choose a particular side, so I vote to stay with the current liberal policies. If you don't want creepy Internet websites to see your private information, go to private browsing.

I believe it is fine the way it is, seeing our little bubble is a great way for the government to keep its people happy. In the movie "Fight Club" Tyler Durden talks about how oxygen is a sedative that the government uses to keep their people in line and happy. With the bubble everyone feels like their opinions are right because their opinions are what show up first on google or any other search engine, and people LOVE to be right. With this bubble the government is able to keep the people happy, which makes a better nation over all.

I do not believe that the government should create a policy concerning filtering algorithms on the internet. I do think there should be some policy though. I don't think the government should create this policy mostly because no matter who is in office, they will be biased to their political party's beliefs and such. And if this happens, there is almost guaranteed to be a large percentage of the United States population who is completely opposed to this. I think if maybe a non-profit organization created a policy then it would not have any bias. Also, if a private company made a policy, then they would bias the policy towards their best interests.

If the government does not create a policy about it, I believe that nothing will be done about it; however, that does not mean that government should do anything. Filtering what people see is a technique that makes people like a certain website and that helps regulate business.

At first I thought that it was unjust for the government to decide what we get to see, but it's good. The government is not necessarily hiding news from us, but giving us want we want to see. If you are not interested in how Taco Bell's meat is bad, then they're not going to filter any news about Taco bell's meat to you, which should make you happy. We somewhat determine what categories interest us and which do not, and the government tries to feed us information based on recent searches. I agree with the government to try to filter only information that concerns us.

Everyone always talks about how great it is to have an open mind, but honestly, how many people are actually willing to change their opinions on topics. People may complain about having a filter and being cut off from some news, but even if the filter was nonexistent they would probably ignore that news in the first place. Some people are just too stubborn to think about certain things differently. Everyone just spends the majority of their time convincing others to think their way because obviously their way is best. I think the filter doesn't even matter. Most people still don't know that filter even exists. If a Liberal did a search for news on an issue and saw both Liberal and Republican results, then they would only pay attention to the Liberal influenced stories anyway. What difference does the filter make? People like to think what they think. The filter is not that bad. This is not China where you are cut off from more than half of the internet world. This filter just tailors your search results to match your political beliefs or religious beliefs. In reality, people just aren't willing to change their opinions. Eliminating the filter would not change the articles people choose to read.

I probably never would have noticed that my search results are specifically for me if it had not been brought to my attention. Even though i haven't really noticed it I think that it is important for everyone to get results on both sides of a topic. I think with these "Filter Bubbles" people are forming very biased opinions without even looking at the other sides view. I think the only thing that would need to be changed is to give people the option to turn on or off the algorithms. That way if you want limited results to expedite your research or a much broader result list you can get it easily.

The author poses the question, which of the three problems facing congress is most problematic? Although all seem to create great problems within the system, it seems to me the most problematic is the fact that each of the sides, Republicans and Democrats, are becoming more and more different in their opinions. This is only problematic because their opinions contradict one another. As one side becomes more and more conservative and the other more and more liberal, compromise becomes less and less likely. The main way laws are passed is by a majority of votes. As more of congress becomes more strongly opinionated, they are less likely to be swayed to the other side of a vote allowing for a majority. The end result is that nothing gets done. Unless members of congress can find a common ground and a way to compromise in order to achieve a common goal, the future looks bleak.

Because of rapid changes in internet with great sites like google, yahoo and facebook i think it is a good idea to create these filter bubbles. obviously their main point is to help the user by showing them what they are probably looking for based on what they have looked for in the past. If someone is searching google and only getting their political point of view's documents, then it's probably what they want. If they really wanted the other point of view's opinion they could find the websites that are more biased towards the other end. I like filter bubbling on facebook because I have many friends on facebook that I do not really know and only showing me what my friends are doing on facebook is nice.

No it is not alright to see only results that mirror your political beliefs. If one only sees results that mirror one's own beliefs, it is near impossible to get a complete picture. When one has both sides of the story it is very easy to figure out what the truth is. when opne only sees one side of the story one only can go on half the picture and try to fill in the blanks from what is known.Kyle Skipper

I enjoyed the TED video that we watched in class. I don't believe that it is right that we only see articles and sources that mirror our political views. It is not good that we only see things that revolve around our political views because then we will have a biased opinion about what events are going on in the world today. I would not have noticed that I was only seeing things on general websites such as yahoo and google that mirrored my political views and things I have looked up in the past. I think that filter bubbles would be a good way to help find what you are looking for on the internet.

I believe that it is not okay that such algorithms have been put in place so that you are only seeing search results and posts based on your previous searches and your personal political beliefs. This pushes people to become more radical in their beliefs and does not teach them how to take in other people’s beliefs and opinions. I believe that without being exposed to ideas that challenge your own, then we as people are not able to fully comprehend who is truly right and who is truly wrong. In addition, this also doesn’t allow for a middle ground to be met, therefore we are not learning how to compromise.

With the compitition growing between search engines such as google, yahoo and bing, each search engine will try to pin point your particular interests by only showing you the information you want to see. Because of this I believe that it is a good idea for different sites to use filter bubbles to only target certain information that relate to you in order to compete against different search engines. If google only shows you information you want to hear, you will tend to use google more often than other sites who show you both sides of the story.

I believe the filtering of what we see on the internet is detrimental. We are being fed information that is tailored to our beliefs, and we are only seeing one side of things. It is important to see different points of view, so as to better decide what we believe. We should at least have the choice to have the information we see filtered or not.

Although websites may think they are filtering out political information that we do not want, they are actually eliminating the possibility of us learning what the other side believes. Even if one sides strongly with a certain political view, it does not mean that he or she does not want to know what the opposing thought is. Search results should include all political views and beliefs. The government should force web sites to let the internet users decide if they want a filtered version of the internet. The decision should not be up to companies like google or yahoo. We are a part of a democracy. POWER TO THE PEOPLE!

I believe it is not okay to have our search results filtered. I think that we should be able to see both sides of a cause. As well as both political beliefs, I think its good to see both sides of a cause. I think the government should regulate these filtering algorithms. But I also believe the government should leave the internet untouched. As the internet has always been a place to see everything.

When websites filter the information that we see, they believe this is what we want, and ultimately need. But what they do not realize, is that they are obscuring our views to only one direction, and not letting us see both sides. The only way a person can truly validate what they believe, is if they see both sides of the argument. Search engines should allow us to see both sides, or at least give the option to see a filtered internet. The only way our society will relinquish its bias, will be to open up the truth for all to see.

I enjoyed watching the TED talk in class. I found it very interesting. I do not think it is okay for websites to control what we can and cannot see on the internet. Although we will probably end up looking for the things they have pop up for us we should still be able to have an option of what we want to see. I also dont think it is okay that people are unaware this is happening on these major websites. We should be able to look at whatever we want without our political beliefs getting in the way.Meagan E.

The TED video talked about algorithms the internet uses to filter the things we see when we Google things. I don't think that algorithms are a good thing. I feel that we should always be open to other peoples beliefs, whether they are similar to our own or not. Its always good to hear from someone who doesn't agree with us, because it gives us an opportunity to learn what other people think. With the algorithms that internet sites like Google and Yahoo are using, we aren't exposed to other peoples ideas because people don't normally visits websites that don't share the same views as them, so all people are exposed to is more of their own beliefs. I believe that all websites should have an option to turn the algorithms off, because then people can be exposed to more ideas then just their own.

As the Ted Video told us that we are only seeing the things we usually look at and not getting the whole picture of a story. I believe that this can be a good and bad thing. It can be good because if you want to look up your favorite artist you can get only results on their music and find good songs by them. But it can be a bad thing because you wont be able to find new artist and check out new songs. In the end i think this filtering stuff can go either way depending on what you are looking up. The one thing they may want to do is to have the top links of your search by the ones that relate to you and the bottom links be the ones that don't really relate to you.

In the Ted video, it was revealed that companies such as Google and Yahoo monitor a person's searches and make it so that the results have common similarities with their previous searches. In my opinion, this is unfair, but necessary at the same time. It is unfair because we should not be limited to seeing only what these companies believe we want to see; that is similar to communism. It is somewhat convenient, however, because chances are you really only want to see things that you have commonly looked at in the past. I think that the algorithms should be modified in a way so that you can turn the search limitations off or on.

Only receiving search results that mirror your political beliefs can be dangerous because you are not getting a balance of information. If we only see the results that the site believes we would prefer, we could be missing out on valuable information about world news. To be educated politically, we must have knowledge about all kinds of points of view, even those that are different from our own. Additionally, the Internet should be a tool that aids in our understanding of the wealth of information it has to offer us. Although I think that filtering search results without our consent is limiting, government interference seems like it would violate the corporations' right to choose how to run their website. Instead, we should be aware of the filtering that is taking place and seek information that might not be immediately handed to us.

I do not believe it is okay to only receive search results that mirror one's beliefs because then there is an imbalance of information on what you see on the internet. First of all, how is one going to know what side they support when they don't see or hear about any opposing opinions? Yes, it is good to receive information on what you believe in, but it is also good to see other people's opinions on an issue. I don't think Google should have the right to restrict the results a person searches on the internet. Everyone should have the same information, articles, ads, etc. when they browse on the internet.

After watching the TED talk on filter bubbles, I can say that I agree with the speaker. I do not think it is fair for Americans to receive biased, one-sided, or any other type of filtered search results. News access should be impartial and available to everyone. By reading opposing sides of the story, citizens would be able to better understand the issue and expand their general knowledge on a subject that they may feel strongly about. If we are to trust monopoly sites like Google with out email and search histories, it is only fair that they give us unbiased, accurate search results.

The problem with the search engines filtering the information you get based on your political beliefs is that they are not asking if you want it to be filtered. It is alright if there is an option to have the content flitered based on political belief but as of now there is not. A good number of people want to see both sides of an argument but if they search something in a search engine then they'll only get their views of it and not the other side's. There should be a policy that the government sets on the Filter Bubble so that people can turn it on and off. This is only so that people can see what they really want to see.

I understand the concept behind the filter bubble and think that it was a reasonable idea. However, where the filter bubble heads south is that it restricts the allowance of different viewpoints. The solution is to allow for the filter bubble to be turned on and off by the user. If a student is conducting research it is imperative that they have facts from all sides, in this case the filter bubble needs to be turned off so that they are not restricted to one side or opinion.

When search engines and social media sites decide what we see and what we don’t see they are taking away our right to have all resources available to us is being taken away from us. Without seeing certain other people’s views on things we can become too engrossed in our views and become one dimensional on how we think about politics and other things. The government should not be able to create a policy about filtering of the Internet. The internet has nothing to do with how the government is run or any policy that they should be worried about. The ones who should handle this is the people who run the search engines or social media site, they should give users the option to turn on or off the filter.

I do not think it is okay that we are only seeing search results that mirror our political beliefs. I think that we should see a variety of results no matter our political beliefs because I feel we are being cheated of what we are looking for. If we search something, we expect all of the results it gives, not just from how we stand politically. We are not getting to see the big picture, only what the internet thinks we need to see. How are we going to fully understand what we are searching for if our results are limited? Everyone should be able to search something on the internet and come up with the same end result with the same answers.

I agree with Katie that i disagree completely with not being able to see every search result. It is not fair whatsoever to block people's results based on their political beliefs and past searches because they get biased information, and to be on one side of a political debate (or any argument) the person must also be very familiar with the opposing side. You can't just say "Oh I'm republican because I think they're better and no one likes democrats," because that obviously shows that you're a lazy idiot. It's impossible to win an argument if you don't know any facts about you're opponent, and with the search results being shrunk down to your political beliefs, it's impossible to get the true meaning and information for the other side. The limits that they put on our searches are completely unfair and it might actually change the outcome of some elections if they would take the restrictions off.

I too agree with Katie and Jake. The fact that people are unable to view their opposing beliefs due to filter bubbles is appalling. I believe that the only true way for a person to fully understand something is for them to not only be knowledgeable of your own beliefs, but to also be aware of opposing beliefs that you may disagree with. Overall, the filtering system must be altered to a better system that does not limit a person to their own beliefs.

The filter bubble should not be used because it doesnt allow people to develop different view points and it makes the interenet control what information your getting. Another problem with the filter bubbles is that people who have different political points but search the same thing both have differents search results so its makes it that people could be getting false information, while the other person that searched the same thing is getting good information just becuase of their political views and the internet shouldnt be based on your political standing.

I think that by having filter bubbles is a bad thing because not everyone gets the same information. If the government made a policy to set guidelines for filtering the Internet, I think it will not be very strict. People need the basic important information and not just what they what to see which is what filter bubbles do for people. Search engines such as Google should be standard so that people do not have dramatically different results and others. People should not just live in their own little bubble because they aren’t getting different views on topics this way.

Personally the whole filter bubble thing is quite irritating. Sometimes, it is a bad thing and sometimes its not. Trying to debate the good from the bad is a really tedious process because the internet has limitless topics and ideas. On the topic of government, I suggest that the government might manipulate the filters to show good things about themselves and bad things about their opponents. However, at the same time, when I am on a website with ads I do like how they design them to relate to me. Sometimes I see something that I really like and wouldn't have ever seen it or been interested in that item had there not been an ad for it. It is also nice that google brings up the most relevant topic about the things that I search because if I am searching for something specific, I don't want to go through the hassle of finding it. The filter bubble thing can be avoided because if you really wanted to find something then you could google the thing directly and find what you were looking for. This was really hard to explain and I am sorry if its not in great syntax and order.

It is interesting to see how the internet is evolving and growing each and every day. Something that is new to the internet is the search bubble, or at least it is very new to me. I don't find that it's right that Google and other search engines are controlling what we see on the internet based on what we have looked up in the past. I understand that Google thinks they are doing us a favor but it is really something that seems to be getting on everybody's nerves. Google, Facebook, and other search engines should have a preference button so that nobody is restricted to any information on the internet. -Karen Lefferts

Although many people will disagree, i see filter bubbles as extremely useful for us lazy folk. These "bubbles" allow me and im sure many others to find exactly what they are looking for without further research. However, it is important to note that this is not entirely truthful and should be monitored more carefully. As an opposite to my previous statement, these bubbles dont allow the other side or sometimes even the truth to be exposed.

I personally do not think it is okay if Google is only bringing up search results reflecting one’s political beliefs. It doesn’t make you aware of the outside world. It especially is not beneficial around election time when we should all be well aware of what all is going on. It’s just like Facebook. The newsfeed is there to inform you what other people are doing in this world. But if Facebook mirrors your lifestyle, it becomes restricted and suddenly you are not so involved with the rest of the community. Everyone should be politically involved; therefore Google should not mirror your political views.

I think that filter bubbles are both necessary and a hindrance. They are necessary because it filters information so we can access what we are interested in more easily. They are a hindrance because they stop us from viewing information that is important. For example, there may be something really important politically going on, but I might miss it because most of my posts are about cats or something. I think there should be a box we can check that says that we want it to be filtered. This would be a good idea because we would get the best of both worlds.

First, I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed Eli Pariser's talk. I never would have noticed that this filtering is taking place in some of our most trusted sites without having viewed it in class. But there was one aspect of the video that most people would agree on, and thats how all these networking sites "filter" our information. I believe it is morally wrong to alter what we view on these sites. Our political views are our political views, and hiding what they don't want us to see isn't doing much to what we believe in. What if something politically is going on and a strong believer isn't aware? Someone who spends a big part of their life studying politics, can't view it? Is that right? The answer is no. The internet is changing drastically, but not necessarily in a good way.Davis Devereaux

I am glad I saw Eli Pariser's talk. I was completely unaware of filter bubbles on the internet today. Seeing only one side of the story is not beneficial for scholars and researchers or anyone interested in politics. For example, a political story broadcasted on fox is interpreted differently than the same story on msnbc. If your information is filtered, you might not be able to see both sides of the story because a search result will usually not show both news stations. Filter bubbles will inevitably changed people's political views. Theses sites should not automatically filter information but allow you to manually select which sites you would like to see. Google, Facebook and other sites are wasting their time trying filter and personalize information.

Follow our Blog by Email

General Guidelines and Reminders

1. Please treat this blog as classroom space. Speech that is inappropriate for class is not appropriate for our blog. While we encourage you to engage in discussion and conversation with others on-line, we also expect that you will conduct yourself in a manner reflective of The Parish Way.

2. Contributing to a blog is a public activity. Anything that gets posted to the Internet stays here. Forever.

3. Never give out personal information on our blog. These pages exist as a public space on the Internet. Please "sign" your comments with first name and last initial.

We aspire to create an on-going deliberative dialogue: a safe, respectful on-line community that engages in political conversations to learn from each other, rather than to debate and 'win.'